Quotes of the day

posted at 8:01 pm on November 22, 2012 by Allahpundit

To the extent Republicans have a problem with their candidates, it’s not that they’re not conservative enough. Where are today’s Nelson Rockefellers, Arlen Specters or George H.W. Bushes? Happily, they have gone the way of leprosy.

Having vanquished liberal Republicans, the party’s problem now runs more along the lines of moron showoffs, trying to impress tea partiers like Jenny Beth Martin by taking insane positions on rape exceptions for abortion — as 2 million babies are killed every year from pregnancies having nothing to do with rape.

The vast majority of those in the American middle class haven’t lost their jobs and probably don’t expect to lose them. Their economic concerns revolve around being and feeling poorer than they were and felt in 2007, being or feeling trapped in a house worth less than it was, and being or feeling trapped in a job that pays less than they thought it would by now—and in all these cases, prospects are for extraordinarily modest improvement at best.

To such people Romney had nothing to say; he stuck instead to those generalities about America being a nation of entrepreneurship that celebrates success and rewards hard work and dreaming. That’s all well and good, but many people work hard without dreaming; and it is a violation of the central conservative idea of the dignity of the individual to confuse the idea of “success” in life with purely financial success as a result of risk-taking.

Thus did the flight from content create a fatal problem for Romney. He may have thought his lack of specificity would lend him more appeal, but in the end, it made him less appealing because he offered nothing but words. The exit-poll question he lost most definitively to Obama was about which of them “cares about the problems of people like me.” Obama won it by a staggering 81–17. There was some moaning in conservative circles that this indicated a dreadful decline for America, its final Oprah-ization. That is a terrible misunderstanding. Of course politicians should “care about the problems of people like me.” The “problems of people like me” are the root of all policy. Otherwise being a politician is nothing but regulation and management.

You cannot beat something with nothing. Obama had a record that was less than nothing but a machine and an approach to victory that were more than enough to add up to something. Romney, in the end, had nothing but Obama’s nothing.

***

It is also worth noting that in states that were not considered battleground territory, Mr. Obama could still have won without a majority of the Hispanic vote. In California, Mr. Obama took the state’s 55 electoral votes with 72 percent of the Hispanic vote, but could have won with as little as 25 percent. And in Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), where Mr. Obama received an estimated 80 percent of the Hispanic vote, he could have still carried the state with just over 37 percent.

With these five swing states, along with the safe Democratic states that Mr. Obama should have carried regardless of the Hispanic vote, the president would have reached 283 electoral votes, winning the Electoral College without needing to win a majority of the Hispanic vote in each state…

Low-information voters trend younger and are more likely to be unmarried. They typically remain at least nominally ‘undecided’ until the bitter end, and generally do not read or watch extensive political or news coverage. They may care about economic issues in theory, but the tax rate doesn’t impact their day-to-day existence.

Democrats – Barack Obama in particular – go after these voters with gusto. The 2008 Obama campaign broke ground by advertising on Xbox video games, prompting thousands of stoners to get off the couch and out to the polls. In 2012, when young women visited a beauty blog, they were likely greeted with video ads of Eva Longoria or Scarlett Johansson telling them Obama was fabulous. And lest we forget the infamous ad where Girls star Lena Dunham invited her fellow young women to make their “first time” special with Barack Obama.

***

Yet aside from the folksy Reagan of humble beginnings, and these two isolated successes, no other Republican candidate has managed successfully to play the populist card, as someone who did not just pander to but actually liked the working classes. George H. W. Bush’s reelection campaign of 1992 was sabotaged by the cranky, animated populist, Ross Perot. The latter far better appealed to the third-party antecedents of the Tea Party…

Romney should have waded into blue states, especially low-income and minority areas—not because he had a real chance of winning a California, New York, or Illinois, but because he could use such occasions to remind all Americans, especially independents and conservative Democrats in swing states, that his agenda was aimed at getting the underclass jobs, empowering the lower middle classes, and giving all Americans more freedom of choice. The Romney economic message should have been aimed not just at job creators but at job seekers: smaller government, he should have argued forcefully, ensures that more people will be hired in the private sector…

Romney might have agreed to higher income tax rates not, like Obama, on those who make over $250,000, but instead on the real millionaires who make over a $1 million—and who statistically are more likely to be Obama supporters. How odd to hear Romney damned for supporting lower taxes for the 1 percent—by the 1 percent of Hollywood film stars, attorneys, and media superstars. He also could have opposed tax breaks for the very wealthy, like elite politicized foundations, and ended government subsidies for large wealthy agribusiness concerns…

Republicans will fail if they allow Democrats to promote the myth that their present alliance of the very wealthy and the poor is somehow more populist than empowering the middle and upper-middle classes. To become the true populists in our media-driven, electronically wired culture and to counter the Democrats’ art of class warfare, Republicans must not just argue for free-market solutions that help the hard-pressed middle, but they should look and talk—if not live—like them too.

***

The politics of entitlement reform may be debatable, but the math is not. The aging of the population and rising health care costs are together triggering explosive growth in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. If left unchecked, these programs will place a crushing burden on federal taxpayers, cripple states and stifle economic growth.

It isn’t moral to impose these problems on future generations. It isn’t right to cede ground to liberals and allow ever higher taxes to chase ever higher spending, while government takes on an increasingly intrusive role in people’s lives.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

The magically disappearing then reappearing Boner and McConnell shouldn’t get any more of a pass for 2012 than the out to lunch Hastert and Frist tag team of 2006. Despicable as they are Nanzi Pelosi and Dingy Harry at least made an effort to hammer a message across during the campaign.

Boner and McConnell went from one inflated claim of planning on doing something to another yet did virtually nothing of substance. Issa failed to deliver as well.

It isn’t just the candidate. It’s the team. Boner and McConnell were no shows this year just as they have been for close to two years now. I wouldn’t want either of those two running anything besides a ski resort in July or snowball stand in February. Now they may simply fall back on excuses of blaming the hack media which is a factor… yet Ronaldus Magnus overcame the hack media factor by taking the campaign local with great success. Reagan didn’t simply want camera time… he demanded results and got results. Palin got results in 2010 because she got in Zero’s face, put him off his guard, had him reacting to her statements, Zero buying 2 gummint buses with taxes because she had bought one with her own money. Not Ivy League elitist but neither was Ronaldus Magnus… just someone who stood her ground for core beliefs and willing to get in their faces rather than need reach for tan in a can and face time right before splitting for Congressional breaks.

No, Sarah didn’t get more votes than Romney. As of today the count is:

McCain 2008 (final) – 59,948,323
Romney (in progress) – 60,008,186

crosspatch on November 22, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Right. Romney ran against the worst president in US history, while McCain was running against Chicago Jesus Lightworker, but wooooo hooooo! Romney has pulled into the lead over Sarah by 60,000! Pathetic.

One thing I noticed about GOTV was seeing Obama ads on ESPN and Big Ten Network. Didn’t see a Romney ad on either one. They may have had them, but I didn’t see ‘em. Lots of young people watch those channels.

When you’re fishing, you have to go where the fish are.

predator on November 22, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Romney could’ve run ads on a loop 24/7 on every conceivable outlet and it wouldn’t have made a difference.

Pennsylvania’s Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) is slashing the hours of 400 adjunct instructors, support staff, and part-time instructors to dodge paying for Obamacare.
“It’s kind of a double whammy for us because we are facing a legal requirement [under the new law] to get health care and if the college is reducing our hours, we don’t have the money to pay for it,” said adjunct biology professor Adam Davis.

Look. If you have old people who need a lift to the polls and nobody calls them, if you can’t even tell if they had voted or not, you are going to lose the election. Republicans on election day could not tell who had and who had not voted. They had nobody knocking on doors because they were relying on Orca to tell them which doors to knock. Orca was broken.

Dems had exactly the same problem in 08 but had a backup. Republicans didn’t. That isn’t Romney’s fault, that’s the party’s fault. The party should have had a backup plan if for no other reason than having to learned from what the Democrats did in 2008.

Now they may simply fall back on excuses of blaming the hack media which is a factor… yet Ronaldus Magnus overcame the hack media factor by taking the campaign local with great success. Reagan didn’t simply want camera time… he demanded results and got results.

viking01 on November 22, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Reagan was a grassroots hero; Romney was a GOPe favorite. Reagan had a harder time of it in the primaries against Bush the elder than Romney did in his primary contests. Reagan had to deal with a media that was just as liberal then as it is now. And Reagan won against the second-most beatable incumbent in a century; Romney lost against the MOST beatable one. Period. The excuses are wearing thin.

Romney could’ve run ads on a loop 24/7 on every conceivable outlet and it wouldn’t have made a difference.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 9:44 PM

You may be right. But if you’re not going to put out the effort, what the hell are you doing in the race?

The effort, the GOTV, is what I’m talking about. As I said up thread, we don’t try to make inroads to the Hispanic vote, the black vote, the union vote. None of it. And like it or not, we have to sell the conservative message to those groups or it’s doomsday for our side. Changing demographics and all that. It is a reality.

Paul Ryan wanted to campaign in urban areas (and I think that he could have been a persuasive salesman), but the Romney handlers put a kibbosh to that plan.

I think that sometimes the handlers are too insular; they fail to look at the whole picture of possible electorate supporters.

I don’t think that husbanding campaign resources is the reason for their myopia either. They just live in their own bubble. (Wasn’t Romney’s campaign staff made up largely of MA people? Now, I know that Obysmal relied on the Chicago machine, but they are knee-cappers.)

Right. Romney ran against the worst president in US history, while McCain was running against Chicago Jesus Lightworker, but wooooo hooooo! Romney has pulled into the lead over Sarah by 60,000! Pathetic.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 9:44 PM

I can’t recall your politics, but McCain did not run against an incumbent. A big factor, IMO.

Reagan was a grassroots hero; Romney was a GOPe favorite. Reagan had a harder time of it in the primaries against Bush the elder than Romney did in his primary contests. Reagan had to deal with a media that was just as liberal then as it is now. And Reagan won against the second-most beatable incumbent in a century; Romney lost against the MOST beatable one. Period. The excuses are wearing thin.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Reagan had a number of very big advantages over Romney. For example – 12 to 13% inflation and 14% plus mortgage interest rates. If just those two items had existed on November 6, 2012, Romney would almost certainly have won and maybe in a landslide.

The effort, the GOTV, is what I’m talking about. As I said up thread, we don’t try to make inroads to the Hispanic vote, the black vote, the union vote. None of it. And like it or not, we have to sell the conservative message to those groups or it’s doomsday for our side. Changing demographics and all that. It is a reality.

predator on November 22, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Changing demographics? So how do you tailor conservative ideas specifically to, say, the Hispanic population?

Conservatives are never ever EVER going to win by thinking they need to balkanize the electorate and then try to pander some votes out of this or that group. And that’s all that would amount to in the end. Last time around, it was “you gotta get those indies”. Romney got the indies and still lost. Next time it will be “you gotta get more Hispanics”.

Reagan had a number of very big advantages over Romney. For example – 12 to 13% inflation and 14% plus mortgage interest rates. If just those two items had existed on November 6, 2012, Romney would almost certainly have won and maybe in a landslide.

It makes me laugh my ass off CW. All the liberal institutions who see obamacare now and doing what they claimed the evil Rethuglican business owners would do. Anyone have the stats on waivers issed to date. I laugh.

PS, the want to take my insurance away by abolishing Tricare for retirees. Where are the big stories on obama hurting the military.

Alright, I’m off to Target. Maybe I’ll check in later. :)

22044 on November 22, 2012 at 9:38 PM

My Thanksgiving shopping to avoid Black Friday shopping involved purchasing a Taurus Judge PolyCarb 2.5 inch revolver for Mrs Hawkdriver (not her real name) and I liked it so much, I bought one for myself.

Dems had exactly the same problem in 08 but had a backup. Republicans didn’t. That isn’t Romney’s fault, that’s the party’s fault. The party should have had a backup plan if for no other reason than having to learned from what the Democrats did in 2008.

crosspatch on November 22, 2012 at 9:48 PM

ORCA was Romney’s project and the ‘Death Star’ wasn’t powered up until election day.

Pennsylvania’s Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) is slashing the hours of 400 adjunct instructors, support staff, and part-time instructors to dodge paying for Obamacare.
“It’s kind of a double whammy for us because we are facing a legal requirement [under the new law] to get health care and if the college is reducing our hours, we don’t have the money to pay for it,” said adjunct biology professor Adam Davis.

-Biggovernment(breitbart’s site)

Libs are stoopid.

CW on November 22, 2012 at 9:46 PM

.
The ones on the “grass roots” level, yes. Totally.

But the higher-ups pushing this whole thing, know exactly what they’re doing. There are no “unintended consequences” where they are concerned.

Paul Ryan wanted to campaign in urban areas (and I think that he could have been a persuasive salesman), but the Romney handlers put a kibbosh to that plan.

I think that sometimes the handlers are too insular; they fail to look at the whole picture of possible electorate supporters.

I don’t think that husbanding campaign resources is the reason for their myopia either. They just live in their own bubble. (Wasn’t Romney’s campaign staff made up largely of MA people? Now, I know that Obysmal relied on the Chicago machine, but they are knee-cappers.)

onlineanalyst on November 22, 2012 at 9:50 PM

I said something similar numerous times. The handlers were too insular—MA people in a bubble. (We lived in NH on the MA state line so I’ve seen this). At one point I think I said that all the campaigns should hire someone who would be given immunity from firing so that person could tell the candidate everything they were doing wrong.

Back to the MA people. I believe the woman who was an underling who made some gaffe is from GA, but from what I read the top people had been with Romney for years. It’s good to have advisers who know you well, but you also need other perspectives.

I can’t recall your politics, but McCain did not run against an incumbent. A big factor, IMO.

RedCrow on November 22, 2012 at 9:53 PM

I’m a conservative. McCain didn’t run against an incumbent; McCain ran against the guy who was possibly going to be The First Black President, Lightworker, Unifier, Salve of White Consciences The World Over. Romney ran against an incumbent who was obviously inept and who had presided over economic stagnation the likes of which mwe haven’t seen probably in decades, if ever. This was part of the reason so many Mittfans were crowing about the upcoming Mitt landslide, remember? Things were so bad that the people would elect Ham Sandwich. It appears that it takes a little more than that.

I wonder where all the Romney money went if it wasn’t to the GOTV operation. I heard rumors that it was being given away to Congressional candidates. The misallocation of funds in this election really needs to be examined.

Doomberg on November 22, 2012 at 9:28 PM

I received at least 20 letters through the mail from the Romney campaign in the last few months leading up to the election. They were from Mitt, Ann, his sons, campaign managers, and various politicians. I stopped reading them after I had received about 5. It was total overkill because they also bombarded me with emails every day that were similar to the letters. Let’s say the total cost(postage, paper) to send me those 20 letters was $8. How many other people who donated to his campaign got all those letters too? If there were 2 million people then that is $16 million spent on repetitive letters sent via snail mail.

Reagan had a number of very big advantages over Romney. For example – 12 to 13% inflation and 14% plus mortgage interest rates. If just those two items had existed on November 6, 2012, Romney would almost certainly have won and maybe in a landslide.

Now we have a Romney supporter crowing about the fact that ROmney has inched above McCain in popular vote, while ignoring the fact that McCain was running in a time of Bush fatigue, war fatigue, and economic “collapse” and to top it off the Dem nominee was the unknown, no-record Chicago Jesus. Romney, on the other hand, was the hyper-electable hero of moderate-leaning get-those- indies fetishists who was running against an incumbent who was presiding over practially zero economic growth, unemployment in the teens and rising food and fuel costs.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 9:30 PM

You have correctly pointed out the differences in the playing field.

The 2008 Bush fatigue alone was a huge handicap for McCane/Palin to overcome. Nevermind the euphoria over Obama who had no record to attack.

Given these factors it’s astonishing that anyone would crow about Mitt doing better by what 60,000 votes out of 60 million.

You don’t have to “tailor” it to any group. But you do have to promote the message to all groups. That’s my point. It’s not even being tried in too many areas. It has nothing to do with “tailoring.”

Conservatism doesn’t have to be “tailored.” It sells itself if you make the effort and know how to present it.

Oh, and screw the so-called indie/moderate crowd. I become more convinced every day that they are just libs who don’t want to admit it.

You have never seen me post here about going after the valued “indies.”
Never.

predator on November 22, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Right. I agree completely then. But I remember saying quite a few times before that first, the GOP is going to have to suffer yet another embarrassing defeat before there will be any change. Second, the country is going to have to get a good bellyful of Obamanomics and overall Democrat economic idiocy before they wise up. And the time will come.

Changing demographics? So how do you tailor conservative ideas specifically to, say, the Hispanic population?

You don’t pander or balkanize any group. You persuade each demographic by showing them the advantages of embracing conservative values and policies. People do respond out of self-interest. A skillful politician tailors the message with specifics of those advantages of conservatism.

For example, the youthful Paul Ryan could have hit the college-age crowds to emphasize policies of economic growth that would have opened up jobs to them upon graduating. Pointing out the poor showing of college grads with jobs in the Obysmal economy is a start. Also, letting them know that they will be on the hook for more taxes in their lifetimes than their parents ever faced unless Obamacare is cut or serious tackling of Medicare/SS debt is faced might resonate with them. Reminding them that they have very few years left before they will not be covered by their parents’ health insurance and that having a choice about how they want to pay for their own insurance are meaningfully tempting topics.

You don’t have to “tailor” it to any group. But you do have to promote the message to all groups. That’s my point. It’s not even being tried in too many areas. It has nothing to do with “tailoring.”

Conservatism doesn’t have to be “tailored.” It sells itself if you make the effort and know how to present it.

predator on November 22, 2012 at 10:00 PM

You just have to incorporate the word “immigrants” whenever you talk about the economic opportunity that conservatism will bring. Keep doing it over and over. There is no need to bring up amnesty or “immigration reform”. I have seen quite a bit of Liz Warren on TV here in Mass and she constantly works the phrases “middle class” and “working families” into everything she says. If you are a low info voter you are bound to hear it a few times and might actually think she will fight for policies beneficial to people who work for a living.

Wrong. And it’s getting tiresome to hear this (noxious, too, once you understand the petty exculpations and fiefdom-protecting impulses behind it). Romney most decidely was the problem. You cannot be presented with as demonstrably bad a presidency and as target-rich an opportunity as Barack Obama and fail to make your case and not be the problem.

He wasn’t the only problem, and no good analysis should leave out the GOP’s long record of failure in addressing the political infection of the Left (and its record of actively colluding with it) which led to Obama. But Romney is part and parcel of this failure. Indeed, he embodies it.

1. Reagan could inspire people to vote for him.
2. Reagan was not afraid to attack his opponent.
3. Reagan knew how to communicate conservatism.
4. He believed in conservatism to the point where he made persuasive arguments in its favor that hit home with average people.

Right. I agree completely then. But I remember saying quite a few times before that first, the GOP is going to have to suffer yet another embarrassing defeat before there will be any change. Second, the country is going to have to get a good bellyful of Obamanomics and overall Democrat economic idiocy before they wise up. And the time will come.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Couldn’t agree more with both your points here. That’s why I’m such a supporter of the Let It Burn mindset. It’s the only thing that may wake people up. It could be a very rough go, but people need to get out of this “free ride” mentality and realize that it the long term, it doesn’t exist and cannot survive.

For example, the youthful Paul Ryan could have hit the college-age crowds to emphasize policies of economic growth that would have opened up jobs to them upon graduating.

onlineanalyst on November 22, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Why hadn’t the youthful Paul Ryan been hitting the college-age crowd before? Y0u see, therein lies the problem. Reagan spent several years building up a constituency, a “fan base” of “nutters”, as manyt of our past ‘bots would have it. And it paid off. A lot of Romney supporters apparently believed you could pull something like that out of thin air just by wishing it.

predator: I think that you and I are on the same page as far as strategies.

I was getting two of the same mailers from the Romney campaign twice and three times a week. Why? That effort (and campaing money) should have been spread around for more outreach.

Ironically, I gave no money to any candidate this year, not because I didn’t favor some, but because I didn’t think that it was being spent wisely.

The other point in terms of better strategizing is that the Republicans had better hire some linguists and marketing people to help them research how to frame the selling of a candidate and to teach some of the candidates how to handle the media.

You cannot be presented with as demonstrably bad a presidency and as target-rich an opportunity as Barack Obama and fail to make your case and not be the problem.

He wasn’t the only problem, and no good analysis should leave out the GOP’s long record of failure in addressing the political infection of the Left (and its record of actively colluding with it) which led to Obama. But Romney is part and parcel of this failure. Indeed, he embodies it.

rrpjr on November 22, 2012 at 10:09 PM

The people have spoken…
And it’s not laid on Romney to show how Obama has failed..
We have a free press to show this,….and we know where they stand.

Couldn’t agree more with both your points here. That’s why I’m such a supporter of the Let It Burn mindset. It’s the only thing that may wake people up. It could be a very rough go, but people need to get out of this “free ride” mentality and realize that it the long term, it doesn’t exist and cannot survive.

predator on November 22, 2012 at 10:11 PM

It was going to burn even if Romney had won. That’s the dirty little secret.

In an analysis of the Florida primary, Dr. McDonald, who directs the United States Elections Project at George Mason, found evidence of potential weakness for Mr. Romney. The data showed that in urban and suburban counties that Mr. Romney won, voter turnout was lower than in 2008. At the same time, in the rural and more conservative counties won by the second-place finisher, Newt Gingrich, turnout was higher, suggesting voter excitement over conservative candidates but a lack of passion for the race in more moderate areas.

But we’re not going to win any elections by telling ourselves fairy tales about a candidate who lost because he wasn’t conservative enough, articulate enough or mean enough.

***

Even newly elected Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas complained that Romney failed to get across that there are “two viewpoints and directions for the country” and that he erred by trying to “be a nice guy.” As Cruz said, “I’m pretty certain Mitt Romney actually French-kissed Barack Obama” in the third debate — proving once again that comedy is harder than it looks..

Come on Allah.

Talk about cherry picking and twisting a piece. The paragraphs you used were satire. This one just the second one after you stopped makes it clear Romney was exactly the problem.

How many other people who donated to his campaign got all those letters too? If there were 2 million people then that is $16 million spent on repetitive letters sent via snail mail.

Wigglesworth on November 22, 2012 at 10:01 PM

I received a minimum of five or six mailings a week for months. Photographs, fancy reply cards, cardboard mailing envelopes… Some days, I received three or four of these expensive looking mailings. I wrote about it here a couple of times. I did not even donate to the campaign until after the first debate and then, after the second debate… I wanted my money back.

1. Reagan could inspire people to vote for him.
2. Reagan was not afraid to attack his opponent.
3. Reagan knew how to communicate conservatism.
4. He believed in conservatism to the point where he made persuasive arguments in its favor that hit home with average people.

SparkPlug on November 22, 2012 at 10:10 PM

.
Reagan is the ONLY presidential candidate I have heard say,

“Government isn’t the solution to the problem. Government IS the problem.”

.
How I wanted to hear any one of the Republican candidates to say that, last year.

It was amateur hour and this from a guy who’s prime selling point was that he could get things done.

sharrukin on November 22, 2012 at 10:20 PM

And his supporters know it. Thus all the lame excuses. TruCons cost the election…no wait! It’s not true moderates lose all the time because the base showed up in record numbers!!! The electorate is a bunch of stupid commies….no wait! The election was stolen from Mitt by fraud!!! I’ve never seen such incoherence in my life.

…How many other people who donated to his campaign got all those letters too? If there were 2 million people then that is $16 million spent on repetitive letters sent via snail mail.

Wigglesworth on November 22, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Same here. While I’m in a battleground/swing state, I started to feel like Romney was wasting money on me. Obama knew better and I probably got one or two things in the mail during the last 6 months. Romney, RNC, PACs, whatever hit me daily. The last couple weeks, I got multiple robocalls per day. I wanted to tell them not to worry about me (they had my vote) and use the money elsewhere.

My point is that Boner and McConnell get defined by others as milquetoasts because they fail to define themselves through putting up any genuine fight. Frist and Hastert fell into the same complacency and quickly got booted for it. The other point is that Palin stood for things which had Zero going from tantrum to tantrum yet who was Palin’s greatest obstacle? The Beltway GOP.

My to-do list of whom to primary next opportunity? Anyone that voted to confirm Kagan, Sotomayor, sleazy Eric Holder and the long list of freaks and malcontents currently running the cabinet. Had freaks Kagan and Sotomayor’s confirmation been delayed or denied then traitor Roberts might not have sold out though I certainly wouldn’t bank on it for the Chief Justice of easy virtue.

The GOP used to have a reputation for some fiscal discipline, strong national defense, personal responsibility. There have been opportunities to deny funding for PBS and NPR, to dump the Departments of Education and Energy, to control the EPA etc. They could even have said no to some of GWB’s spending excesses. They’ve had years, years to put financial discipline before the public in opposition to the DNC whereas the candidate has only a few months to define himself or herself. The GOP leadership feints the “nuclear option” then disappears. Anyone remember the laughable Trent Lott voicing his “power sharing” madness? I wish I could remember Frist or Hastert’s positions on anything just as I wish I could remember anything substantive Boner or McConnell have voiced, ever. Plenty of momentum from 2010 completely squandered by someone weeping how lucky he was to attain the job he’s avoided. Condescending Rove’s stock keeps dwindling as well.

I’m not defending Romney as he was about third or fourth choice on my list though he was capable if not particularly inspiring. He became more easily defined by the opposition press as Beltway as usual because GOP leadership simply haven’t bothered themselves to stand for anything different. I mentioned Reagan because as an outsider people could relate to him. Palin as an outsider people could relate to her… except blowhards Noonan, George Will, Krauthammer’s disdain was notable, as was Carl Cameron’s huffiness. She was successful at overcoming backstabbers like Steve Schmidt to continue on to give Zero plenty of testy moments two years ago.

I agree with you and others that the gravy train now will have to crash for the public to realize no free lunch when the bank is empty. It won’t be pretty when the perpetually entitled notice the teat has run dry. The inner city won’t be the place to be when it finally hits the fan.

1. Reagan could inspire people to vote for him.
2. Reagan was not afraid to attack his opponent.
3. Reagan knew how to communicate conservatism.
4. He believed in conservatism to the point where he made persuasive arguments in its favor that hit home with average people.

SparkPlug on November 22, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Agreed Sparky
I would add..this is not the 1980′s.
Hello people? The greatest gen has died off or is dying off and the number of illegals are not quite at the same levels..many factors.
I don’t see how it can be compared..different time. Demo’s have changed as has the landscape.

. Romney ran against an incumbent who was obviously inept and who had presided over economic stagnation the likes of which mwe haven’t seen probably in decades, if ever. This was part of the reason so many Mittfans were crowing about the upcoming Mitt landslide, remember? Things were so bad that the people would elect Ham Sandwich. It appears that it takes a little more than that.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 10:00 PM

.
You’re clueless. Still.
You probably still think being a “Food Stamp President” is a bad thing. Romney’s problem was that he was rich. And Kanye West and the Big Media machine convinced enough people that it was bad and Anti – American to be rich. And those that didn’t vote just dont care anymore. Romney was more uniquely qualified for the POTUS job than most candidates we have seen. The election was not about the economy and jobs, rather it was about vagynas, racism and hating poor people.

We all learned that its not 1980 anymore and the tipping has been reached, and this is a center- left country that does not give a crap about policy or responsibility.
And that isn’t Romney’s fault.

And his supporters know it. Thus all the lame excuses. TruCons cost the election…no wait! It’s not true moderates lose all the time because the base showed up in record numbers!!! The electorate is a bunch of stupid commies….no wait! The election was stolen from Mitt by fraud!!! I’ve never seen such incoherence in my life.

ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Yeah, they know it. The problem is that they are acquiring a long record of losing and its frankly embarrassing. So they are searching for any and every excuse they can because the left-wing of the Republican party isn’t about to concede that their approach doesn’t work.

Delusional. These people haven’t “gone the way of leprosy,” they’ve graduated to control the entire party from top to bottom and are essentially a majority within the ranks of elected Republican officials.

Doomberg on November 22, 2012 at 8:29 PM

This whole thing just reinforces what I believe a lot of us have suspected for a good long while now, and that you’ve mentioned yourself: these so-called “vanquished” liberal Republicans that are now controlling the party detest the conservative base more than they do the Dems. Why else would they not lift a finger to assist Allen West, for example? I don’t need to mention the continued vilification of Sarah Palin, but it’s all part of the larger problem.

IMHO, there can be a lot of seemingly small things ( this, for instance) coming from the Dems particularly (at times assisted by the Progressives within the GOP not putting up any resistance) that add up to a concerted effort to squelch Conservatism as a movement. It all fits right in with the long game they are playing and have been playing, and one in which we are forever playing catch-up.

Why else would they not lift a finger to assist Allen West, for example? I don’t need to mention the continued vilification of Sarah Palin, but it’s all part of the larger problem.

IMHO, there can be a lot of seemingly small things ( this, for instance) coming from the Dems particularly (at times assisted by the Progressives within the GOP not putting up any resistance) that add up to a concerted effort to squelch Conservatism as a movement. It all fits right in with the long game they are playing and have been playing, and one in which we are forever playing catch-up.

PatriotGal2257 on November 22, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Wasn’t the new district he ran in redrawn by republicans? Tells you all you need to know. Why would his own party put him in that position? If I’m wrong, I’ll gladly stand corrected, but I think he was done in by the GOP itself.

I don’t need to mention the continued vilification of Sarah Palin, but it’s all part of the larger problem.

PatriotGal2257 on November 22, 2012 at 10:33 PM

That reminds me of another exquisite inconsistency I’ve noticed since the election: people squealing “Stop dumping on Romney!!!!” when many of those same people have spent the past 4 years dumping on Palin. It’s hilarious.

Romney was more uniquely qualified for the POTUS job than most candidates we have seen. The election was not about the economy and jobs, rather it was about vagynas, racism and hating poor people.

Romney couldn’t connect to people…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney was easily painted as an out of touch rich guy…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney lacked any appeal to social conservatism…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney authored a similar plan to Obamacare…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney was fine with big government when he was in charge…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney had a poor record of job creation in Massachusetts…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney failed to unite the base after the primaries…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney ran a disastrous GOTV effort…but that’s not Romney’s fault.
Romney played Casper Milquetoast to Obama’s thug politics…but that’s not Romney’s fault.

We all learned that its not 1980 anymore and the tipping has been reached, and this is a center- left country that does not give a crap about policy or responsibility.
And that isn’t Romney’s fault.

All I will say is..as I mentioned before..I work in insurance..all hell is breaking loose..and it is dark days.
Only reason I voted for effing Connie Mack..hate the dude..but was sooooo praying we had a chance at repealing parts if not all.
This will be a disaster of epic proportions..mark my words.

It was amateur hour and this from a guy who’s prime selling point was that he could get things done.
sharrukin on November 22, 2012 at 10:20 PM

And his supporters know it. Thus all the lame excuses. TruCons cost the election…no wait! It’s not true moderates lose all the time because the base showed up in record numbers!!! The electorate is a bunch of stupid commies….no wait! The election was stolen from Mitt by fraud!!! I’ve never seen such incoherence in my life.
ddrintn on November 22, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Romney’s always gotten it done. He was an excellent candidate. This shows how hard it’s going to be. The country will hit bottom before it comes back, if ever. What do you two know-it-alls do for a living?

Indeed. The 1980s when so many voting knew and had paid the cost of freedom. Educated by reality instead of owed-something rants. When so many voting were mindful of the Great Depression and toughness. Having a willingness, pride and self-respect to keep themselves afloat not seeking a lifelong government ride. Knowing where their kids were because their own parents had taken the time to know where they had been. No victim’s cards needed when mostly no excuses necessary for what they were and how productive they showed themselves to be.

Wasn’t the new district he ran in redrawn by republicans? Tells you all you need to know. Why would his own party put him in that position? If I’m wrong, I’ll gladly stand corrected, but I think he was done in by the GOP itself.

predator on November 22, 2012 at 10:37 PM

He was the only one we gave money to. Didn’t help, but that’s okay.

He, like Palin, had to be taken care of because no corruptocrat wants to hear someone nattering at them about cronyism, fraud and waste.

I have a few reasons. I have med conditions I am dealing with, lost faith in all the BS-and I am tired of young black racist trolls race baiting every thread and its all good here or something.
Just a few people hear I miss. You have the forest..I am there. Worry not. :)B9 lives.
Amnesty..also has be burning a fuse. Eff it all. I am not an extreme so/con…I see little diff anymore. The right makes me want to hurl too.

All I will say is..as I mentioned before..I work in insurance..all hell is breaking loose..and it is dark days.
Only reason I voted for effing Connie Mack..hate the dude..but was sooooo praying we had a chance at repealing parts if not all.
This will be a disaster of epic proportions..mark my words.

bazil9 on November 22, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Yep. My sister is HR Director where I work. She also sits on a regional board of companies who deal with health care for their employees. She says a real mess is coming. We are keeping our current plan for 2013, but premiums went up over 10%. She has no idea what is coming in 2014, but she’s not optimistic.

I remember the reputation Taurus used to have, and shy from it. I know they are first class now, but I’m old.

cozmo on November 22, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Didn’t actually shoot it today. I just liked the concept and dry action. We’re going to the property tomorrow to check on the house and shoot her pistol. Mine had to be ordered on line. It’ll get to our Gander Mountain when I’m in TN. The S and W (Governor) I looked at too. It is very comparable, shoot the 45 auto also, but wasn’t in the price range to justify me getting a second pistol. I got her Judge for just about 400 and my’ll be 450 after shipping and a 50 dollar rebate. Happy Thanksgiving Cozmo.

Heh, those will be fun for a round or two at the range…even better in the truck when you need them.

I’m building a SBR, tax and registration be damned, I just want one. Building off a Noveske chainsaw lower. 7″ never looked better :P

tom daschle concerned on November 22, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Yep, the neighbor where we’re building has a lot of trouble with stray bruiser dogs. Sorry to say I’d think some of it is military folks not taking they 3 year back yard alarm systems with them when they PCS. We have a lot of migrant workers who fight the big dogs here also. No one seems to want to do the right thing by them so they just let them go in the woods near Pope AAF and Ft Bragg. As far as the weapons themselves, I understand they were designed by some Texas Yahoo like Cozmo for the women folk in Texas to shoot car-jackers through the window. I bought the .45, birdshot and stacked home defense ammo and we’re going to shoot a bunch of it on the farm tomorrow. She’s pretty excited.

I was amazed that considering Romney’s business success and the fact that he had been running for President for 6+ hears, he didn’t have better campaign leadership. He had people like “Mr. Etch a Sketch,” Andrea Saul and others from the ill-fated McCain team and “GOP strategists” like Kevin Madden, who have one strategy – ignore the base and move to the center.

Obama’s campaign was orchestrated by professionals who knew 2012 campaign strategies. Romney’s campaign was operated by traditional Republican hacks who are more interested in not alienating their liberal friends than winning.

hawkdriver on November 22, 2012 at 9:56 PM
Been thinking about adding one of these to the pistol collection, but what about its recoil, especially for a woman? I’m thinking not bad on the .410s but might be an issue when using the .45s?